Forum:Brickipedia/LEGO Wiki/Talk:Brickipedia/Talk:LEGO Wiki
This is one of those wth moments for me. I have a few questions: # Are we now called Brickipedia or LEGO Wiki? # If we're Brickipedia, then why is our main page titled LEGO Wiki? # If we're LEGO Wiki, then why is the article about ourselves titled Brickipedia? # Why does the talk page for the Brickipedia article redirect to the talk page for the main page? FB100Z • talk • 17:43, June 6, 2011 (UTC) :LEGO Wiki is better for search engine results, the Brickipedia page is another "about us" page, except in the article space. 18:16, June 6, 2011 (UTC) ::Per above, LEGO Wiki is our official name. Brickipedia is the mainpage/everything else name. lol - 19:03, June 6, 2011 (UTC) :We are having an article about ourselves, right? In that case, we can do what we did on MLNWiki: Rename the main page to "Welcome to LEGO Wiki!" and call the article about ourselves "LEGO Wiki." FB100Z • talk • 20:03, June 6, 2011 (UTC) * @NBP: the name of the site is Brickipedia, per and every case where we refer to the site- the main page is at LEGO Wiki only for better search results for us. And our about page is at Brickipedia:About. 05:45, June 7, 2011 (UTC) :* ohhh, okay. wasnt sure, thanks :) - 02:58, June 10, 2011 (UTC) So...shall I make Brickipedia into an article about us? FB100Z • talk • 22:45, June 7, 2011 (UTC) *The United States is sometimes reffered to as just America. I agree that LEGO Wiki is better for search results, and our site name is Brickipedia. I say FB100Z should make that page. 04:49, June 8, 2011 (UTC) Alright, I think this is settled. Brickipedia not an "about us" article, it's an article about us. Oh wait, that didn't make any sense :P FB100Z • talk • 05:49, June 16, 2011 (UTC) * Umm, I've just redirected Brickipedia to Brickipedia:About. Not becuase personally I believe it should be in the project namespace and not the mainspace with our actual articles, but because there is no point in having both pages on the same topic. And Brickipedia was a stub, Brickipedia:About is long. Should we vote on where the page should be located if anyone cares that much? 03:14, June 17, 2011 (UTC) ** I'm personally opposed to cross-namespace redirects, let's discuss this. FB100Z • talk • 17:17, June 19, 2011 (UTC) !voting *'Make Brickipedia an encyclopedia article' - I feel that we're significant enough; it doesn't matter how much content we write about ourselves. FB100Z • talk • 17:17, June 19, 2011 (UTC) *:I'd support redirecting Brickipedia to Brickipedia:About, as per NHL. This is a wiki about LEGO, so we should have mainspace articles only about LEGO. Articles about us should go in a seperate article class, like "Brickipedia:", as we do with our policies. What do you mean with "encyclopedia article"? 18:22, June 19, 2011 (UTC) *::Per the statement made above. 18:46, June 19, 2011 (UTC) *::In that case, we should chuck articles on LUGNET and all those other non-canon sites...I don't like cross-namespace redirects, either. FB100Z • talk • 18:52, June 19, 2011 (UTC) *Yea, if we remove the page on Brickipedia we should remove pages on every other LEGO fansite as well. We are just as notable as they are, and there is no reason why we can't have an article about ourselves. 19:13, June 19, 2011 (UTC) *:The only reason I can think of is a nonexistent notability policy :3 FB100Z • talk • 19:21, June 19, 2011 (UTC) *We have articles on fansites? Well, my vote is if we make a page for us, keep them. If not, delete them and only have pages on official sites. Kingcjc 19:32, June 19, 2011 (UTC) * Per Samdo for the naming, although I agree with FB100Z about not liking cross-namespace redirects. Although, this one could probably be a special case. And I would vote to delete fansite pages- the custom wiki was created specifically to deal with all non-official stuff such as fansites, while we deal with the official stuff. 23:25, June 19, 2011 (UTC) ** Contrary to popular (?) opinion, Brickipedia actually has a lot of fan stuff embedded into existing articles. For example, List of LEGO Abbrevations contains a lot of fan-made terms; should we get rid of all those, since they aren't official? FB100Z • talk • 23:56, June 20, 2011 (UTC)